Proponents of urban transit reform advocate for making municipal bus and rail networks free of charge, contending that eliminating fares significantly reduces peak-hour traffic congestion by inducing drivers to abandon their personal vehicles. However, comprehensive empirical evaluations of municipal zero-fare initiatives demonstrate that the overwhelming majority of newly attracted transit passengers were previously pedestrians or cyclists, not automobile commuters. Therefore, the zero-fare strategy fails to achieve its primary environmental objective while simultaneously depriving transit systems of vital operational revenue. Consequently, city councils should reject zero-fare proposals and instead allocate budgetary reserves toward improving transit service frequency and reliability.
Which of the following best describes the roles played by the two boldfaced portions in the argument?
- The first is a claim presented to support a policy proposal that the argument as a whole opposes; the second is an intermediate conclusion drawn in the argument to support its main recommendation.Answer
- BThe first is the main conclusion advocated by the author of the argument; the second is a premise offered as evidence to undermine an opposing position.
- CThe first is a judgment offered in support of the author's primary recommendation; the second is a counterexample presented to refute the author's central thesis.
- DThe first is an empirical finding used by the author to challenge a traditional strategy; the second is an unstated assumption upon which the author's main conclusion relies.
- EThe first is a position that the argument attempts to establish as correct; the second is a concession made to show that an alternative approach has merit.